I really don't get it!

Paladin said:
My own, personal observations:

1. I like the film-like quality of DVX video images. I actually prefer it to so-called "downrezzed" HD.
2. The DVX will be viable for years yet to come. I would be willing to bet that DVXs will still be shooting eye-popping videos five to ten years from now.
3. The vast majority of TVs in the US are still SD 4:3 CRTs and the players attached to them are standard DVD players.
4. Shoot the video with the DVX. The client will like it.
5. A $500 HD camera cannot hold a candle to a properly lighted, composed and framed DVX video.
6. I tried a couple of HD cameras and ran back to my DVX100B.
7. I prefer tapes. Period. Hard drives fail. I don't trust them. I like having all my footage safely archived on tape. Tapes are more convenient and cheaper.
8. I have, indeed had cards fail (in other applications). Not only that, cards are very expensive and cannot be economically used for archival purposes.
9. Tapes are, indeed, more convenient.
10. Don't know anything about the D90 and don't need to.
11. Keeping up with the techies is unnecessary. Use what you have and what you can afford. A lot of stuff is still being shot, and sold, on 16mm film.
12. I use a DVX100B and I most definitely do not feel that "tech" is pulling away from me. Just because new technology is available, it doesn't mean I have to break my bank just to be "with it."
13. I use a PC (which I built myself for $300) with 2.8G Celeron, 1,5G RAM and 250G HDD. I edit on Adobe Premiere Elements 3.0. It does what I need it to do.
14. I hate MACs. I hate them with a passion.

HD cameras of the DVX's level (with 24p) are expensive; editing HD requires a more expensive computer than I can afford right now; an NLE capable of editing HD costs $800 to $1000; editing HD is more difficult than SD; HD is overkill at this point in time, as most stuff will be viewed on DVD.

I like my DVX100B and see no reason whatsoever to spend thousands of dollars just so I can say I am "with it" with HD technology. Most TVs are still SD, most players are still DVD, and images captured with a DVX100B look fantastin when projected on a full-sized theatrical screen and rival anything shot with 16mm film. In fact, I have people ask me if my stuff is shot using a 16mm camera. I used to shoot with a Bell and Howell 70DR 16mm camera and one of the things I like about the DVX100B is that it is capable of shoot images that look very much like film.

I have no intention of "upgrading" to HD anytime in the near future (or ever, most probably). If I ever "upgrade," it will be when I can finance a project on 35mm film because, in my opinion, that is the only thing I consider superior to the DVX100B.
Click to expand...

Wrong wrong.. While I couldn't find a more recent article but this 2007 article cites HDTV ownership in the US to be 30%.. http://www.eventdv.net/Articles/New...lds-Own-an-HDTV,-CEA-Research-Finds-39288.htm Gotta be way more higher than that today and exponentially increasing HDTV ownership..

Paladin said:
My own, personal observations:13. I use a PC (which I built myself for $300) with 2.8G Celeron, 1,5G RAM and 250G HDD. I edit on Adobe Premiere Elements 3.0. It does what I need it to do.
Click to expand...

Oh ok I see that you don't have very high requirements...
 
To quote the great Rodney "can't we all just get along?". I did some shallow soul searching and decided this... I will stay the course with the 100b and pickup a second one as well. My customers should be happy as long as my quality is better than the competition at a similar price point. I may still try the 35mm lens adaptor route as it is beautiful and ditch the D90 idea for now. I can always build one of the adaptors for cheap and I already have great prime Nikon glass.

I realize that I will go the way of the typewriter but for now (meaning the economic times of today) I will play it safe and invest little until the security of customers is there for me to jump to the next level.

I agree with a lot of the ideas in this post but I also need to remember that most important for now is that my customers use normal DVDs and not Blu-Rays. No one has ever asked for a true HD video. Most seem happy with the 16:9 format I give them on DVD in SD but I have gone to local Costco and seen my DVDs on a nice 42" plasma and I was not impressed with the scaling.

and by the way ... MAC RULES :D and PC DROOLS :( or as my emoticon puts it :nads:
 
Well part of me agrees with Paladin... I do not see the need for HD YET! Our FCC is scaring some people with the whole digital transmission thing and some people think you need to upgrade to an HDTV. But with the DVX, you can still shoot widescreen so I agree that the DVX will not go out any time soon. I do, however like flash memory and hard drives because if you are sticking with the DVX for a while, then investing in something like a firestore might save money in the long run depending on hoe much you shoot. But I will have my DVX for at least 5 more years. It doesn't compare to any other prosumer camera in my opinion.
 
HOLLY F-ING S**T Some of you guys really have your heads in the sand or up your butts. GOOD LUCK!!!!
Let me know if any of you need ribbons for your typewritters, more ice for your TAB or some head cleaner for your 8 track.
Well atleast it's less competition for the rest of us... try to avoid the tarpits
 
Hey... look there is nothing wrong with SD right now. I will probably get an HD camera in like 5 years when EVERYONE has an HDTV. Not 20% of us. And even uprezed footage to 1080 looks just fine. And NO, I don't need any ribbons for my typewriter.
 
Johnny Cola said:
HOLLY F-ING S**T Some of you guys really have your heads in the sand or up your butts. GOOD LUCK!!!!
Let me know if any of you need ribbons for your typewritters, more ice for your TAB or some head cleaner for your 8 track.
Well atleast it's less competition for the rest of us... try to avoid the tarpits
Click to expand...

I'll have you know that many a great novel and screenplay alike were written on typewriters... I'm still very much of the opinion that it's what one does with his/her equipment that makes the difference.

To the OP: if your customer base is happy with the service you provide them, why upgrade until you begin losing those customers specifically because you can't provide them with HD? That said, start putting whatever you can away now so that when that time comes you're ready for the switch. Perhaps sooner than most of us would like to admit, HD WILL be the standard. Period.
 
From my point of view going HD would depend entirely on what your clients want. For me there is no need for HD yet.
 
Most of the stuff I shoot is seen at standard def DVD or 480p (and often less) Flash/Quicktime on the web. HD is still totally valid for this! Just because you are distributing in SD doesn't mean you can get by only acquiring in SD - oversampling is a good thing.

If I do an SD finish on HD footage, that gives me a ton of freedom with respect to cropping into the image and generally pushing things around. You may say "just shoot it right the first time" and I totally agree - but this is paid work for ad agencies, and everyone needs to have an opinion, and that most definitely includes the edit room after the shoot is long gone.

Another big element of this - let's say something you shoot takes off unexpectedly, and you start getting requests from people who want to show it, or release it somehow. Maybe it's as simple as a client asking for HD copies of a job you did a while back now that Blu-Ray is more prevalent. By acquiring your image in a higher resolution, you can future-proof it to an extent. When literally almost everyone is using high-def systems in a few years, your videos aren't going to fare as well, although good upconversion in DVD players can work miracles, I will grant that much.

The original poster mentioned having a hard time editing HDV, renders taking ages, etc - that's because you're trying to edit HDV! Bad idea! Get it into a real editing codec like ProRes or Cineform and then see how well your system holds up. It may still need upgrades, but you'd have to be a masochist to edit in native HDV.

Bottom line, I still shoot stuff now and then on the DVX too (I like it particularly for handheld 35mm adapter work, and I can get away with it for web presentation). If it's between a DVX you know and love and get the most quality possible out of, and a low-end HDV camera you hate that doesn't give you the same control and so forth - no brainer, go with the DVX. But something like Canon's XHA1 is going to blow the DVX away, and you're not sacrificing anything in the way of controls. Or take a look at an HV40 or HFS100... if you know what you're doing, you'll blow your clients away. In the end it's about knowing the tools and also knowing the right tool for the job. But believe me, you will sooner rather than later want to move away from SD acquisition.
 
I agree with Oedipix. I will check on the other HDV cameras but would be a kicker for me would be if the work I did from a HD imported to FCP as a SD could be later reimported as a HD and keep all of the original cuts and edits. Is that possible?

andythefilmer said:
Our FCC is scaring some people with the whole digital transmission thing and some people think you need to upgrade to an HDTV.
Click to expand...

I second that thought. My area was forced to go to digital if you did not already use cable or satellite for your incoming TV signals.

How much Firestore is needed for a SD video capture at about 3 hours? Is there a standard number used to relate one hour of video to a one hour Firestore capture? I do not want to over buy the Firestore right now. Our local TV station shoots with HD cameras to P2s but due to the enormous capture file size, they shoot the cameras in SD and uprez for the final HD transmission.
 
What you're missing is that you'r not selling your stuff to the end user. You're selling it to distributors, networks and festivals, you are also competing against other professionals who try to stay on the edge.

I've seen about 50 narrative shorts at Sundance, Slamdance, Tribeca, Philly Cinefest this year where my shorts were in the last three.

Not one of them --- not ONE of them --- was shot SD.

Also there is a great Documentary on the festival circuit called Zombie Girl about a 13 year old girl & her mom (which was her entire crew) that made her first feature (a zombie flick). The doc is absolutely wonderful, fun, inspirational, campy, killing at Fests, winning audience awards left and right ... it's having trouble getting distribution because it was shot on SD ... yep, that's the feedback they're getting. We love it .. we're apprehensive about the format.

I guess if you're shooting stuff you don't want people to watch in 3 years, or I guess if you find a distributor that's pulling a "Producers" scam where they just want to get a bunch of movies out there and declare bankruptcy or something by the time everyone is HD - then yeah sure go for SD.

But ... really ... really you should have your head examnined for going with a DVX if you can afford an HMC150 given the relative price points and the fact that you can get into quality HD on affordable media for what a DVX cost a year or two ago ... really.

You already have a trusty SD DVX ... why get another, when you can get an HD camera for what you paid for your DVX ... you could be versatile and not deliberately short shelfdating all your material.

Makes no sense.

And please ... please ... please ... just drop the D90. That camera is compeletly obsoleted for video with the advent of the GH1, which I already told you.

Getting a D90 (for video) with the GH1 out would be truly, truly asinine.
 
Want a two camera shoot? Use the HMC150 and intercut it with your DVX. It shouldn't take too much futzing with the menus to match them. Use the 150 for wide shots and the DVX100 for close shots, as I'm sure you know close ups fool the eye into thinking it's seeing more detail.

Also - In addition to the D90 for video now, Firestore is another dinosaur.
1) Firestore went bankrupt.
2) The net is filled with horror stories of lost footage and video shot in the wrong pulldown. I've been personally hired as a consultant to try and come in and rescue firestore footage.
 
FINALLY:

OP: Don't get the HD thing, should I get another DVX100b or a D90.

SOME PEOPLE: HDSMACHEDEE. Who needs it I get by fine with SD.

SOME PEOPLE: Are you nuts? I find HD is lots better even down converted, and I've seen many instances where SD was a problem or would not be up to snuff for aesthetic or business reasons.

DECISION A: Stick with SD and only be guaranteed OK for my current clients. Have no future proofing. I don't believe the guys who say it's an issue now.

DECISION B: Upgrade my second camera to an HMC 150. It's almost as inexpensive as the 100B and I'll have two great intercuttable cams (colorwise), and in case these crazy guys stating real world examples are right about this HD thing, well then I'll be OK in that event too. Cake and eat it too.

One decision covers all bases. One definitely does not in a future proof sense, and if you lend any credence to the HD responders here, hinders your options even now.

Maybe I should start my own thread entitled "I don't get it." :)
 
First off, let me say that I would never argue with JDS in regards to the independent film world. :) That said, I don't think the OP is talking about the independent film world, but rather the event/corporate video world, which IMO is at least a somewhat different world if not an entirely different world. And since the event/corporate world is the world I do my video work in, let me try and come at this from that angle.

At this point, if you have an SD camera that's working for you and you're not getting requests from your clients for HD, I would not worry about upgrading just yet. However, if you're looking to add another camera, I don't know that buying SD in 2009 is the greatest of ideas. Now, there's a lot of factors involved in adding a camera, like are you planning for multi-camera shoots where it's going to be a lot easier to have 2 of the same thing, so I'm not going to say that you should never ever under any circumstances still buy SD, but I would certainly urge you to at least consider going HD with a new purchase.

And I've been through this decision myself lately. My company had four "prosumer" cameras in our rental inventory: an XL1S, two DVX100A's, and a GL2. A while back, one of the DVX's was stolen, and back in March I finally had an excuse to work on my boss to replace it. :) The choice was pretty much down to the DVX100B or the XHA1; the HMC150 started out on the short list, but the lack of SD shooting modes and the AVCHD workflow took it out of the running pretty quickly. (It's a great camera, and someday I very much want to have one in our inventory, but this just wasn't the time.) When the time came to write up the order, we went with the A1.

Now, that's not to say that the A1 is going to be right for everybody. But I think it's at least worth a look. It gives you HD capability if/when you need it; but for the short term, switch it over to SD mode and shoot good-ol'-fashioned mini-DV. When you do need that HD, you're still in a tape-based environment with (from my understanding, anyway) not a huge increase in the computer system you need to edit. (Although we didn't have an HDV camera previously, apparently our editing guy has worked with HDV footage before, from a customer's camera, and was able to work with it on his far-from-state-of-the-art PC. :) I think it's a P4 in the 2.6GHz range.)

And nothing against the HMC150 or the HVX200, I would never try and talk anybody out of buying either if they wanted them. (And, as I said, once we're ready for it, I'd love to have an HMC150 in our inventory.) But I felt that, right now, either of them was too big a jump for us; and I know from reading these forums that I'm not alone. :)

So that's how I came to my decision, hope it helps at least a little...

[EDIT: JDS snuck in there while i was typing. :) His "Decision B" is a much more well-written version of what I was trying to say. One quibble, though--to the best of my knowledge, anyway, the HMC150 doesn't have an SD mode.)
 
It's okay, Jack. Sometimes it's hard to grasp. But let me see if I can help:

Hey OP, the GH-1 shoots Standard Definition right along side with those manual controls in a format you can pretty much drop into any NLE and cut. D90 is old hat, don't shoot yourself in the foot, it hurts.

Did I does it?

Seriously, Jack has very sound and experienced advice. For Event shooting, let me say that I have an HPX170 and Letus Ultimate 35mm Adapter. I used it on my brothers wedding. I would have KILLED to have a GH-1 present instead.

Snap photos, BAM, switch over to video, BAM, back again. Lowlight performance whips the ragged asses of most prosumer level video cameras, including the DVX.
 
Captain Pierce said:
First off, let me say that I would never argue with JDS in regards to the independent film world. :) That said, I don't think the OP is talking about the independent film world, but rather the event/corporate video world, which IMO is at least a somewhat different world if not an entirely different world. And since the event/corporate world is the world I do my video work in, let me try and come at this from that angle.
Click to expand...
No I realize that, my point about future proofing and having an HD cam while you already have an SD cam still stands though. One limits some options. One opens to all options.

Also "Zombie Girl" is doc. An indpenendent film yes, but I don't think they are talking about theatrical distro so much as something for Discovery Channel or TLC or Bravo or Chiller etc, or straight to video.

Captain Pierce said:
...
....one of the DVX's was stolen, and back in March I finally had an excuse to work on my boss to replace it. :) The choice was pretty much down to the DVX100B or the XHA1; the HMC150 started out on the short list, but the lack of SD shooting modes and the AVCHD workflow took it out of the running pretty quickly. (It's a great camera, and someday I very much want to have one in our inventory, but this just wasn't the time.) When the time came to write up the order, we went with the A1.
....
[EDIT: JDS snuck in there while i was typing. :) His "Decision B" is a much more well-written version of what I was trying to say. One quibble, though--to the best of my knowledge, anyway, the HMC150 doesn't have an SD mode.)
Click to expand...
Yes good point on the A1 vs the 150 not having and SD mode, forgot about that/edited my post since you typed this though. A1 should definitelt be in the mix. I mean look at the stuff Disjecta did with that cam.

So basically it would come down to matching panny colors to panny colors while having to down convert if you wanted to intercut
vs
Starting in the same resolution and trying to match Canon colors to Panny colors but not having to deal with AVCHD, but having to cross convert codec anyway.

Personally, I'd do the 150, stick with the Panny colors, use it for wide and long shots, use the DVX for close shots, make it all pro res and edit it on a 720X480 timeline.

Now we're down to the level of what's best for your preference in post though, a reasonable conversation vs. (in the "I don't Get It" spirit of the thread) the crazy talk of refusing to shoot HD when one already has an SD camera and could be armed and ready for both.
 
PhilMNoir said:
why upgrade until you begin losing those customers
Click to expand...

God I wish there was a meme or icon that could adequately express my level of LOLing and ROTFLMFAOing.
Great advice buddy! I think that's basically the business model companies like Oldsmobile followed... WOW!
 
To Johnny Cola:

There is a difference between offering honest, well-intended advice and just being rude, inconsiderate and obnoxious. Perhaps you should try to learn that difference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top